Bishops shouldn’t try to censor the blogosphere, says priest blogger

Fr Tim Finigan says Church leaders should not be using 'personal standing to squash disagreement' after blog controversy

A leading English priest blogger has said that it’s impractical for bishops to seek to “censor the blogosphere”.

Fr Timothy Finigan, author of the Hermeneutic of Continuity blog, made the comment after Bishop Michael Campbell of Lancaster asked Deacon Nick Donnelly “to voluntarily pause from placing new posts” on his blog Protect the Pope.

Fr Finigan, parish priest of Our Lady of the Rosary in Blackfen, south east London, wrote: “I do wonder about the practical wisdom of attempting to censor the blogosphere. Protect the Pope now carries posts by Mrs Donnelly, and she has offered an invitation to others to contribute material – which several writers have already taken up. Other censored bloggers can also simply start up a new blog under a pseudonym, or use alternative social media platforms – Facebook and Twitter are well-known but the possibilities are endless. As activists on the internet pointed out years ago, censorship is just another bug for which you find a hack or a workaround. The danger is that a previously censored commenter will be probably not be inclined to moderation in a new social media incarnation.

“Bishops also have on their side the great respect of most Catholics for Bishops. Quite often a blog will criticise a Bishop severely, only to find that another blog tells a different side to the story, or the Bishop issues a statement clarifying things – and then receives a lot of support from Catholic bloggers. The discussion will continue, but the Bishop is not exactly powerless to defend himself. Bloggers work in an environment which is open to everyone. One of the healthy things about such open communication is precisely that you cannot rely on personal standing to squash disagreement.”

After the bishop’s request Deacon Nick Donnelly, who writes the Protect the Pope blog, will be taking an indefinite break from blogging, while his wife, Martina Donnelly, has taken on the running of the blog for the time being.

A statement released by the Diocese of Lancaster last week said: “After learning that a notice had been placed upon the Protect the Pope website on March 7 saying: ‘Deacon Nick stands down from Protect the Pope for a period of prayer and reflection’ the Bishop’s Office at the Diocese of Lancaster was able to confirm that Bishop Campbell had recently requested Deacon Nick Donnelly to voluntarily pause from placing new posts on the Protect the Pope site.

“Meanwhile, it was also confirmed that the bishop asked Deacon Nick to use this pause to enter into a period of prayer and reflection on the duties involved for ordained bloggers/website administrators to truth, charity and unity in the Church. Deacon Nick has agreed to the bishop’s request at this time.”

In a short statement on the Protect the Pope website Martina Donnelly wrote: “As Nick’s wife I am writing to thank you for all the kind messages, prayers and gifts that Nick has received. You may have noticed that he has not posted for a while and I did not want you to be worried, as although he is still far from better, this silence has not been caused by his illness. Rather Nick has been asked to observe a period of prayer and reflection. Please continue to pray for Nick during this time.”

When asked by The Catholic Herald if he thought his blog had ever crossed the line, Deacon Donnelly replied: “No.”

He said: “I think blogging is an incredible tool for evangelisation, I started blogging in 2010 before the papal visit because I felt I needed to answer lies and misrepresentations about the Catholic Church. When I launched Protect the Pope it received coverage all over the world. I even received coverage in Vietnam. When I finished Protect the Pope I was getting 100,000 views per month.”

He said that the aim of his blog was simply “to compare and contrast what’s being said and done in the Church with the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That can never be wrong.”

He said that he would rather not continue blogging in the future if it meant that he would have to change this basic aim. He emphasised that the “period of reflection” was indefinite and added: “The past three days I’ve had so many messages of support from my readers, even people who don’t agree with me. I’ve found that really encouraging. That’s been a positive experience from all of this.”

When asked if he thought that Catholic bishops understood the blogosphere, he said: “My feeling is that their a priori position is suspicion and they don’t understand blogging’s potential. They don’t react to it well.”

Meanwhile, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has told the leaders of the world’s ordinariates that while blogs could be a helpful tool of evangelisation, they could also “express unreflected speech lacking in charity”.

The image of the ordinariate was not helped by this, he said, and it fell to the ordinaries to exercise vigilance over these blogs and, where necessary, to intervene.

COMMENT POLICY

The Catholic Herald comment guidelinesAt The Catholic Herald we want our articles to provoke spirited and lively debate. We also want to ensure the discussions hosted on our website are carried out in civil terms.All commenters are therefore politely asked to ensure that their posts respond directly to points raised in the particular article or by fellow contributors, and that all responses are respectful.We implement a strict moderation policy and reserve the right to delete comments that we believe contravene our guidelines. Here are a few key things to bear in mind when commenting…

•Do not make personal attacks on writers or fellow commenters – respond only to their arguments.•Comments that are deemed offensive, aggressive or off topic will be deleted.•Unsubstantiated claims and accusations about individuals or organisations will be deleted.•Keep comments concise. Comments of great length may be deleted.•We try to vet every comment, however if you would like to alert us to a particular posting please use the ‘Report’ button.Thank you for your co-operation,The Catholic Herald editorial team

Deacon Nick can keep blogging; his bishop however has a right to fire him from his job. I’d assume that if blogging is so important to him, he would be willing to quit being a deacon.

kag1982

There is a sarcastic tone to some of the deacon’s post and he seems to encourage quite a bit of whining in his comments section. It strikes me as similar to Father Z’s passive aggressiveness. It is obviously his right to post this and it is the bishop’s right to let him know that he cannot keep blogging like that while serving as a deacon.

Benicio del Cartera

Don Cuuuuurleeeeeyhoooooorne!!!! Where are youuuuuu!?

Mutley

That’s Scooby-Doo not Mutley.

Third from left….praying and reflecting.

Been reading the original VII schemas….hair-curling, heart-bleating stuff.

Steve

Nothing but hypocrisy

Dorothy

“… That while blogs could be a helpful tool of evangelisation, they could also “express unreflected speech lacking in charity”.He could say the same thing about the printing press.

Dorothy

Well, one might argue that there is the office of pope and the man who fills the office. One might also argue that when my parents criticized the way I did my homework, they were protecting me from academic failure.

kag1982

Yes, conservative Catholics are now more Catholic than the pope. I’m fine with you criticizing the pope I just find it amusing that the same people who were horrified when the last two popes were being criticized are now experts on famous past pope critics and are okay with criticism. It is especially hilarious when a site created to push back against criticism of Pope Benedict in the UK spends most of its time bashing his successor.

Hypocrisy Hunter

A quite amusing, if still totally nonsensical analysis.

You are far from a “brother” of mine. You are an identity thief.

To the non thieves reading these exchanges please be re-assured. Nothing in the preceding post is remotely true.

Hypocrisy Hunter

If secularism is ever established in the UK, and it is far from the case right now, all views will not just be tolerated they will be encouraged. Inclusiveness is the primary point of secularism.

Secularism will not be imposed on anyone any more than any other system does. It will be approved by our parliament, which you have just as much opportunity to influence as anyone else.

Hypocrisy Hunter

If that last comment makes any sense to anyone I would be truly grateful for an explanation. It seems to me to come directly from Alice in Wonderland rather than anything written by Orwell.

Hypocrisy Hunter

As you are aware, brother, in the bright future of the collective secularist dream, there will be no such thing as “identity”, but there will only be we. And how could we take anything from us ?

We hunters of hypocrisy also need make no excuses nor post any reassurances to any mobs of irrational bigots, and our only purpose here is to enlighten their thinking with lessons and instruction from our clear-minded enlightened brains, which are greatly superior to anything else.

Hypocrisy Hunter

Don’t worry, brother Steve — we have come here to track it down and eliminate it for good.

Hegesippus

And does Scripture not say similar of the tongue?

Hypocrisy Hunter

Don’t be so silly. Secularism will make no difference at all to individuals and to suggest so is simple scare mongering nonsense.

Those in favour are not superior to anyone else. They just seek a level playing field upon which everyone can participate on equal terms. What on earth is not to like about that?

Hypocrisy Hunter

Isn’t it terrible when we argue amongst ourself ?

Secularism will make no difference at all to individuals

There is, indeed, brother, no difference to the society of individuals in between the Secularist and the non-secularist, and this is why it is so important to provide it for them.

The non-change will be a true revolution !!!

Philosophies that can change nothing will be taught to everyone in the bright future secularist régime !!

But I see that we are being modest — but our personal opinion that secularist thought is superior to all other can only be the product of superior brain power !! And given that this is what we believe, this is therefore what we possess.

Hypocrisy Hunter

Well said !! It will indeed be approved by our Parliament, brother, and we will approve it, and we will approve that Parliament !!

We will obey our collective desire, and we will have a zero tolerance policy to intolerance !!!

All that is exclusive will be legally prohibited, whilst everything inclusive shall be imposed by the collective personal opinion.

The dictatorship of freedom will ensure that no dissidence from our collective parliamentary personal opinion can be imposed upon our actions.

Hypocrisy Hunter

As tolerance is unaffected by secularism this reply makes even less sense than your previous ones. That must have required a lot of effort. Carry on.

Simon James Perry

Perhaps the Catholic Herald should be renamed the Catholic Blogosphere.

Hypocrisy Hunter

As tolerance is unaffected by secularism

Brother hunter, we are all too aware that all views will not just be tolerated, but they will be encouraged, and Inclusiveness is the primary point of secularism !!

As such, nobody who lacks inclusiveness will be included in the ranks of the secularists, nor will such people be permitted to join any professions that involve dealing with others, and particularly our children.

All indoctrination of our young will be provided by licensed Government educators, who will have first signed a legally binding Charter to tell these children exactly what the Government has decided that they shall hear, as well as swearing to always uphold the principles and doctrines of secularism in all that they say and do.

The doings of these educators will be permanently surveyed by teams of Inspectors, who will ensure the rectitude of all lessons and their 100% agreement with both the Government Indoctrination Plan and with the doctrines of the National Secularism. Any educators found wanting in these respects will be required to sign documents indicating their spontaneous decision to cease working in this field.

Hypocrisy Hunter

More self contradictory nonsense. I suppose there is one benefit from this series which is why the moderators are tolerating it.

Which is that whilst engaged in composing this you cannot be disrupting other threads, so I am taking the bullets for the team!

Your distorted views on the impact of secularism are well known. That they are completely wrong doesn’t need to be paraded endlessly. You have already demonstrated that very effectively.

Secularism will not make a jot of difference to the way education is organised and supervised. Nor will it require people of different opinions to agree with them. Freedom of expression and belief is an essential part of secularism.

What you fail to recognise is that in any democratic system laws get enacted which some disagree with. It has always been thus.

Hypocrisy Hunter

I am not arguing with you! I am ridiculing you.

Your viewpoint is such transparent nonsense that it doesn’t begin to approach being the parody you think it is.

The more you post the more ridiculous it becomes. No doubt some of your fellow travellers find it amusing, but the more open minded won’t and will likely be getting annoyed. I am surprised that you have survived thus far.

Hypocrisy Hunter

Well said, brother !!!

We grasp the very essence of secularism in the palm of our generous outstretched hand !!

Total freedom of opinion and expression is indeed the central Creed of the secularist revolution, and this is precisely why we should glory in the immediate contradictions that this creates, whilst we provide our pity for those who fail to see, for lack of of the magnificent secularist brain of WE, that the divergence of thought is the convergence of Secularism.

No two Secularists, nor two hunters of hypocrisy, can have the same personal opinion in their minds, but this lack of commonality provides deep agreement on all basic principles, because we will have decided so in Parliament, contrary to all bigoted minority opinion that we will have defeated in a quinquennial opinion poll of the Masses.

Onwards, kind Secularists, to the Brave New Future of the Order of thought from perusing the Chaos of the personal opinions of WE.

Hypocrisy Hunter

Well said brother !!!

Thank you for demonstrating once again how central it is to Secularism that the open-minded should engage in constant lively denigration of personal opinions that they totally reject !!!

This is the very essence of the Secularist open-mindedness.

FrereLapin

They is not hunters of hypocrisy, only I is hunters of hypocrisy.

SpirittisSanctus

Just a thought! If all these ordained priests deacons are spending their time blogging, who is visiting the housebound/elderly/sick. Bringing communion,confession and the sacraments of the church. Ordained bloggers appear quite prolific.Weren’t they ordained to pray administer the sacraments and preach the gospel. Certainly not to spend endless hours in front of computer screens, criticising and whinging about every perceived heresy..well done to the Bishop of Lancaster for stopping DD and his pernicious writings being further published. Wish all the Bishops would do the same. Perhaps Peter Smith could have a word with Tim Finnegan. Just a thought!!!!!!

Man in Black

Doctrine is not Christ

???

I’ve not said anything of the sort. But, as the Gospel teaches, et Verbum erat Deum.

Christ is the Revelation, and the Doctrine is a Fruit of that Revelation.

Doctrine is not one book.

HermitTalker

If the bishop did not meet and discuss with the deacon ahead of time – especially with canon lawyer and theological advice, he gave scandal and sinned against the deacon’s integrity and personhood. The deacon is admirable for his attitude. APO’B.

Hamish Redux

There is no suggestion that Deacon Nick failed in his duties, and your comments are potentially defamatory. It’s part of a cleric’s ministry to promote orthodox Catholic teaching. Bishop Campbell doesn’t seem to be very good at this, does he?

Jacobi

Fr F is absolutely right. Protect the Pope was thoroughly orthodox if a trifle outspoken from time to time . It was never antwhere near offensive and if this level of expression cannot be tolerated then there is something badly wrong.
It raises serious issues for other priest-bloggers, including Fr F, who might now feel threated or compelled to subdue their comment.
And frankly, with the Church radidly going down the plug hole, there are so many other ghastly problems in the Church these days our Hierarchy should be worrying about